Craig Cameron was in charge of list management at MFC under Daniher.

Some jokingly might say he still has got a "finger" on our list management today at Tigers. ie Miller & Maric

Neale D was cooked at the end of 2006....i was amazed he was still coach for the start of 2007..ND is a top bloke, but he had done all he could do.

I remember watching the Fremantle Final with a bunch of Melbourne people in a South Melbourne Pub..and at the end of the game we all agreed the ND era was over, along with quite a few players.

The Fact that the Coach and the list, pretty much the same rolled up for 2007 was asking for trouble...and it is what we got as HT and others have said above.

What the Hell was the previous Board thinking?? Neale Daniher had a great run at the MFC but he certainly had nothing more in the tank.

ND was a man before his time. I actually think that his game plan would have been very effective in the last few years when the press was all the rage. His mantra of fast movement out of defence and long kicks to CHF would have bypassed most zones and given us some great transition with very little tinkering.

Sadly, I can't argue with the state of the list he left us with, although I don't think he can be held solely responsible.

Some jokingly might say he still has got a "finger" on our list management today at Tigers. ie Miller & Maric

Yes. He certainly has extracted the cherries off it.

...

What the Hell was the previous Board thinking?? Neale Daniher had a great run at the MFC but he certainly had nothing more in the tank.

If only they had your amazing hindsight WYL in the areas of coaching and recruiting we would be miles ahead.

He also left the incumbent with pick 4 in the National Draft to work with. The rebuild was a decision the club made, it was not forced upon them because Daniher fed them a vomit burger. I'm not saying it was the wrong decision, but it was a decision - from what you hear not all coaches who went through the interviews for the Melbourne job in 2007 would have taken the same path, but thats hearsay. Regardless, the above list looks a lot better had we not butchered so many first round picks. Neale did his job in terms of coaching a team well on a shoestring budget, and was always prepared to publicly promote the club.

This is a good post Pantaloons but I don't think it is argument against 'Daniher left us a bad list' - it's an a very good critique why he was right to make the moves he made that left us a bad list.

And that may be - he had some scintillating footy in 98, 00, and 02 and saw a window in 04-06 before Neitz went to win a flag. But the moves he made left us with a bad list, and coupled with the fact that we never had the development infrastructure in place (by no means ND's fault), this meant that we were never going to avoid this massive vacuum of good senior players drafted from 1999-2005 that affect our fortunes right now.

Three cheers for the heartless playing group over the last ~8 years

I agree with a lot of this however I just don't believe our return is going to be that much better with 2 quality forwards soon to return & going to help us out of the doldrums this yr! Where's the centre improvTement going to come from

Hope I'm proven wrong as I'd love to see the boys grow an xtra leg with Sylvia & Jurrah firing. Confidence is a great thing and could sneak us some quality wins against Scumwood queens bday, Carlton, Geelong @ Kardinia Farm

As I said initially, drafting has been the key issue.

We have definitely struggled at the Trade table but sadly much of that is out of our recruiters hands - if we dont turn round our "culture" issues soon I suggest we will struggle at the Free Agency table this year.

But IMO it must be easier to predict if a player has a future after they have had two years in the system.

Sadly not always the case. Some players can show you "small pieces" of something yet never quite reach the consistency it takes to play AFL football.

You persevere - sometimes the penny drops sometimes it doesn't. Brendon Goddard - as an example

The problem is if you try to move them on before they have shown the wider AFL community something you have to "do your balls" so to speak.

Bit like the thoroughbred game - I've had horses I want to "shot" at 2YO yet the penny has dropped as 3YO and they have come good. Dam expensive mind you but such is life.

Inversely I've had 2YO that perform & win races yet they are "shot" as 3YO. Sold we make the money and move on - next.

Back to football - all "kids" that get drafted have talent ie they show you something sometimes you just have to wait - some you win some you lose.

But IMO it must be easier to predict if a player has a future after they have had two years in the system.

Than when??

And the if you believe a player does not have a future and want trade him you need to find a club who thinks he will have a future and pay you value above what you value the players future at? And if its based on mediocre form to date who is going to pay over the odds for draft pick you got wrong!!

We have definitely struggled at the Trade table but sadly much of that is out of our recruiters hands -

Huh??

Travis J for pick 16 in 2007.

Brock McLean for pick 12 in 2009.

And from the contrived nature of things MFC did alright getting the 2 picks for Scully.

Than when??

And the if you believe a player does not have a future and want trade him you need to find a club who thinks he will have a future and pay you value above what you value the players future at? And if its based on mediocre form to date who is going to pay over the odds for draft pick you got wrong!!

Huh??

Travis J for pick 16 in 2007.

Brock McLean for pick 12 in 2009.

And from the contrived nature of things MFC did alright getting the 2 picks for Scully.

Yeah I meant attracting the players (Clark a side but many would argue that was a $$$$ deal) - Yeh we have had not had the same problems getting rid of them.

This is a good post Pantaloons but I don't think it is argument against 'Daniher left us a bad list' - it's an a very good critique why he was right to make the moves he made that left us a bad list.

And that may be - he had some scintillating footy in 98, 00, and 02 and saw a window in 04-06 before Neitz went to win a flag. But the moves he made left us with a bad list, and coupled with the fact that we never had the development infrastructure in place (by no means ND's fault), this meant that we were never going to avoid this massive vacuum of good senior players drafted from 1999-2005 that affect our fortunes right now.

Thanks for the reply. I didn't really have much direction to what I was saying, but essentially, I can't fault Daniher for his moves because I agreed with them at the time and to do so would be hypocritical of me. Poor drafting, development and resources can't all be laid at his feet, and while I know that this has been acknowledged in this thread, the title suggests he's a villain in all of this, which I think does him a great disservice. Cheers.

Thanks for the reply. I didn't really have much direction to what I was saying, but essentially, I can't fault Daniher for his moves because I agreed with them at the time and to do so would be hypocritical of me. Poor drafting, development and resources can't all be laid at his feet, and while I know that this has been acknowledged in this thread, the title suggests he's a villain in all of this, which I think does him a great disservice. Cheers.

I know what you are saying, I would prefer to say The Daniher Era © than single out ND himself.

But the fact remains - the lack of resources and development, and the choices made with the playing list during the latter years of The DE is the main reason we are in this mess.

Bailey can be faulted for being soft on those that should have been asked to step up (and for not properly preparing the playing group to have a press in 2011) but he left the list in a very good shape for Neeld (despite what the press thinks this month...).

Yeah I meant attracting the players (Clark a side but many would argue that was a $$$$ deal) - Yeh we have had not had the same problems getting rid of them.

FWIW, MFC does not present a convincing case over the past 5 years to attract big name talent.

But the fact remains - the lack of resources and development, and the choices made with the playing list during the latter years of The DE is the main reason we are in this mess.

And the lingering sore of the salary cap penalties in 1999 and 2000. When Tingay, Viney, Stynes and Lyon all retired within 12 months of each other in 1998/9 followed soon after by the demise of Schwartz, we never refilled those holes and have battled ever since to play catch up.

I know what you are saying, I would prefer to say The Daniher Era © than single out ND himself.

But the fact remains - the lack of resources and development, and the choices made with the playing list during the latter years of The DE is the main reason we are in this mess.

That's more so correct putting it as such. The old' cliche is the "buck stops with the coach" but it's more so that era, and the club itself.

It's certainly the latter years of his reign that are the focus and the all out assault to get the ultimate prize when we were never quite there come August/September. We never had exciting young talent coming through the drafts of 2000-2006. Although people will tell you the likes of Brock, Lynden, Col, Riv and Millzy were there for arguments sake.

It's a sad net return, really.

But hey, enough of the past now it's been recognized. Again. (the last time was mid 2008 on these boards).

Let's look forward as Dr.Who would say, and let Neeld and co. sort out their plans as they continue to use Spak-Filla as best they can and fix these problems left from long ago with improved spending off the field, expanded recruiting initiatives thanks to a beefed up membership as a result of things put in place by the current regime.

I dont really agree with this post - part of the problem with where we are at now is a lack of leadership and endevour - which generally happens when you sack your hardworking captain when he is still clearly the most consistent players in the side; or give Robbo the arse, or offer Bruce a one year contract after all that he has done for the club. Youth focus at all costs put us in a situation where we have second rate players with very little leadership potential trying to inspire a group of young players who were directionless under Bailey.

Four years under Bailey and our list looks worse rather than better.

Sure there were some poor draft pick decisions in the later years of Daniher years and i guess that should be the focus.

Neale's group should have started thinking about a new key forward years before Neitz retired.

Four years under Bailey and our list looks worse rather than better.

On this point I disagree vehemently.

More talent, less journeymen, younger list, more potential.

Bailey failed but the one thing he did do was leave a list in better shape than he found it.

Yeah. I hate the ND hate on this site. He's still the best we've had in my time. He was never great, but I thought he was good for the club and did what he had to do.

The issue isn't as much with MFC, which has expanded and grown yearly... it's with the AFL itself, and the fact it's horribly weighted towards richer bigger clubs. In any 5 year period, usually, Melbourne should have a good crack at it for 2-3 of them on average. Yet the rich clubs liek West Coast have one wooden spoon, then are top 4 quality and now are on top...

They can afford the coaches and players... We lose them. It's money.

The Club nearly destroyed itself through his time... if it was him I'm not sure, but all should have a look at themselves.

Than when??

And the if you believe a player does not have a future and want trade him you need to find a club who thinks he will have a future and pay you value above what you value the players future at? And if its based on mediocre form to date who is going to pay over the odds for draft pick you got wrong!!

Huh??

Travis J for pick 16 in 2007.

Brock McLean for pick 12 in 2009.

And from the contrived nature of things MFC did alright getting the 2 picks for Scully.

yes trade is one thing selection is another

On this point I disagree vehemently.

More talent, less journeymen, younger list, more potential.

Bailey failed but the one thing he did do was leave a list in better shape than he found it.

We've been running on potential at this club for too long. Id prefer the proven journeymen myself. At least they could play.

We've been running on potential at this club for too long. Id prefer the proven journeymen myself. At least they could play.

Agree to disagree.

I want to get to the Top 4.

Journeymen don't get you there.

And that means you have to have to rely on potential at some point.

Lets not forget that under Neale not one KKP player in particular a forward has come through.

They thought that Neitz would last forever, amazingly he was drafted in 1993!

The recruiters have done a shocking job of drafting a key tall forward in the 2000s, when all the other clubs have found them we continued to go after mid fielders

Our best forwards we have drafted are Neitz- 90s, Swarta 90s, Jackovich 90s, Lyon 80s

Lets not forget that under Neale not one KKP player in particular a forward has come through.

They thought that Neitz would last forever, amazingly he was drafted in 1993!

The recruiters have done a shocking job of drafting a key tall forward in the 2000s, when all the other clubs have found them we continued to go after mid fielders

Our best forwards we have drafted are Neitz- 90s, Swarta 90s, Jackovich 90s, Lyon 80s

Nothing likebad revisionism.

MFC actively sort to recruit KPPs during the 2000s.

Breeze in 2000. Molan in 2001. Smith in 2002. Newton, Bate and Dunn in 2004. Holland was traded for in 2003 and was serviceable. We drafted badly. We did not solely aim at midfielders and the Club did not think Neitz would last forever.

I want to get to the Top 4.

Journeymen don't get you there.

And that means you have to have to rely on potential at some point.

Agree with that. Journeyman only fill gaps not build the structure.

MFC actively sort to recruit KPPs during the 2000s.

Breeze in 2000. Molan in 2001. Smith in 2002. Newton, Bate and Dunn in 2004. Holland was traded for in 2003 and was serviceable. We drafted badly. We did not solely aim at midfielders and the Club did not think Neitz would last forever.

Yes. It wasn't so much neglecting key forwards, it was not being able to bring in genuine top quality ones. You can add Nicholson, Lamb, Ellis, Rodgers, Newton and Miller to that list of KPPs (not all forwards obviously).

Nothing likebad revisionism.

MFC actively sort to recruit KPPs during the 2000s.

Breeze in 2000. Molan in 2001. Smith in 2002. Newton, Bate and Dunn in 2004. Holland was traded for in 2003 and was serviceable. We drafted badly. We did not solely aim at midfielders and the Club did not think Neitz would last forever.

Agree with that. Journeyman only fill gaps not build the structure.

Nothing likebad revisionism.

MFC actively sort to recruit KPPs during the 2000s.

Breeze in 2000. Molan in 2001. Smith in 2002. Newton, Bate and Dunn in 2004. Holland was traded for in 2003 and was serviceable. We drafted badly. We did not solely aim at midfielders and the Club did not think Neitz would last forever.

Agree with that. Journeyman only fill gaps not build the structure.

Just stating that the club failed to draft KKP fwd & highlighting that the MFC have a poor record when you consider the extra draft picks they had over the last few years ( time will tell with current picks)

I look at Hawtthorne- Franklin,Roughead

St kilda- Reiwvoldt

I

I wonder what big Neita thinks now...